Fred Vasseur has called for a detailed Ferrari investigation after execution errors prevented Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc from converting the SF-26’s competitive Dutch Grand Prix pace into a podium finish at Zandvoort.
Hamilton finished fourth and Leclerc fifth, but the Ferrari team principal was left convinced that the final positions did not fully reflect the speed available to the Scuderia. Vasseur identified the restart, pit stop execution and strategic decision-making as areas requiring close examination before the next race, after several costly moments repeatedly forced Ferrari onto the back foot.
Fred Vasseur wants Ferrari to investigate its Dutch GP execution
Ferrari had shown enough race pace to challenge Mercedes, with Vasseur believing the SF-26 was at least stronger than the Silver Arrows during the Grand Prix. Yet rather than capitalising on that performance, the Maranello team spent significant portions of the afternoon trying to recover positions lost through execution.
Speaking to Sky Sports F1, Fred Vasseur acknowledged that the underlying race pace had been decent but pointed directly to operational mistakes. He highlighted Charles Leclerc’s poor getaway at the restart, which allowed Oscar Piastri to gain a position despite the McLaren running on the Hard tyre, as one of the first moments that compromised Ferrari’s afternoon.
That setback was followed by a slow pit stop for Leclerc, costing the Monegasque another position. Vasseur described the sequence as confused and particularly disappointing because he felt Ferrari’s outright pace had been strong enough to produce a better result.
The Frenchman therefore wants the team to examine precisely what went wrong, including why Leclerc lost a place while restarting on the Soft compound. The objective is to understand the causes rather than simply accept the outcome and ensure the same problems are not repeated at the following Grand Prix.
Charles Leclerc loses ground after the restart
The first major problem arrived following the restart triggered by Max Verstappen’s opening-lap retirement. Leclerc did not get away cleanly and was passed by Piastri, even though the McLaren was using the harder compound.
Losing that track position immediately changed Ferrari’s task. Instead of using the pace of the SF-26 to attack from its existing positions, the team had to begin recovering ground that Vasseur believed should not have been surrendered in the first place.
It was a frustrating contrast with the confidence Ferrari had carried into the weekend, when the team had outlined its approach for the Dutch Grand Prix at Zandvoort knowing that execution would be vital in a tightly matched field.
Leclerc’s difficulties did not end there. Ferrari later called him into the pits, but the stop itself was slow and another position was lost. Taken together, the restart and pit stop failures left the Monegasque fighting to regain ground rather than making full use of the car’s race performance.
Lewis Hamilton grows frustrated behind Charles Leclerc
The strategy on the other side of the garage developed differently. Lewis Hamilton ran a longer stint and appeared to benefit from the alternative approach, eventually catching Leclerc while carrying more pace.
Hamilton then found himself behind his team-mate and became increasingly frustrated over the radio as he felt valuable time was being lost. Ferrari did not immediately use team orders, despite the Briton being on a strategy that had created greater pace at that stage of the race.
The delay became another important element of a weekend that again raised questions over how Ferrari should manage Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc when their strategies converge.
A delayed decision to pit Leclerc was then compounded by the slow stop. Hamilton continued to voice his dissatisfaction with the way the race was unfolding, at one point asking his engineers whether Ferrari was effectively using him as a guinea pig.
The seven-time world champion’s concerns centred on the feeling that the team was not taking full advantage of his race situation. With the podium still within reach, every second spent behind the other Ferrari reduced the opportunity to close on George Russell in third.
Ferrari pit wall faced a complicated George Russell strategy call
Vasseur was also asked whether Ferrari had considered using Leclerc to undercut Russell in the fight for the final podium position. His explanation highlighted the traffic-management problem facing the pit wall at that point of the Grand Prix.
The Ferrari team principal explained that there was a group of cars close behind that the Scuderia was attempting to clear, while another group remained ahead. Ferrari ultimately selected one strategic option, but the picture changed when cars in front, including Esteban Ocon and Arvid Lindblad, made their own pit stops.
According to Vasseur, that sequence effectively handed Russell the advantage. What had initially been an attempt to manage traffic and create the best possible window instead became another moment where Ferrari’s strategy did not deliver the intended result.
The situation underlined why the team principal’s post-race concerns went beyond a single mistake. Ferrari had the pace to remain involved in the podium battle, but several decisions and operational setbacks accumulated across the Grand Prix and reduced the team’s ability to exploit it.
Hamilton closes on Russell before late Virtual Safety Car
Despite the earlier complications, Hamilton still reached the closing laps with an opportunity to attack Russell. The Ferrari driver gradually reduced the gap to the Mercedes and was within approximately seven tenths of a second as the fight for third intensified.
His progress was then halted on lap 70 by a late Virtual Safety Car following the Williams collision involving Alex Albon and Carlos Sainz. The neutralisation froze the field at the worst possible moment for Hamilton, who had been closing on Russell and preparing for a potential final attack.
By the time racing resumed, only one racing lap remained. That left the Ferrari driver without enough time to complete the pass, forcing him to settle for fourth ahead of Leclerc in fifth.
The outcome reinforced the sense of a missed opportunity for the Scuderia. Hamilton had ultimately put himself within striking distance of the podium despite the earlier strategic complications, while Leclerc had also demonstrated enough pace for Ferrari to place greater pressure on its rivals.
Fred Vasseur acknowledges Hamilton lost time behind Leclerc
With Hamilton having made his frustration clear during the Grand Prix, Fred Vasseur was asked whether difficult discussions would be necessary during Ferrari’s post-race debrief.
The team principal acknowledged that the seven-time world champion had lost time while running behind Leclerc. He explained that Ferrari had, at one stage, been considering whether Hamilton could continue to the finish without another stop, an option Vasseur believed could also have proved effective.
Within that strategic plan, however, following Leclerc was not the intended objective. Vasseur estimated that Hamilton probably lost around one second in the process, even though keeping the Briton out to the end had been under consideration.
The Ferrari boss also stressed that the later developments in the race made it easy to reassess earlier decisions with hindsight. Once the subsequent events were known, the Grand Prix could naturally be reconstructed around alternative calls that might have produced a different outcome.
That does not remove the concerns over Ferrari’s execution. Hamilton’s frustration was one symptom of a broader afternoon in which the team repeatedly failed to turn competitive pace into track position, an issue that has become increasingly important as Hamilton’s championship situation increases the value of every available point.
Ferrari pace leaves Vasseur more frustrated by missed podium
The underlying performance of the SF-26 is precisely why Vasseur wants such a thorough examination. If Ferrari had simply lacked pace, fourth and fifth would have represented the natural limit of the package. Instead, the team principal believes the car was quick enough to challenge Mercedes more strongly.
That leaves execution as the central issue. A poor restart, a lost position, a slow pit stop, strategic uncertainty and time spent with the two Ferraris together on track all contributed to an afternoon in which the Scuderia repeatedly had to recover rather than dictate its own race.
The Dutch Grand Prix had already been identified as an important weekend for the team’s SF-26 performance, tyre strategy and set-up. In race trim, the speed was ultimately encouraging enough for Vasseur to believe Ferrari had more available than the final result showed.
That makes the review in Maranello particularly important. Vasseur does not want any area overlooked as Ferrari works to understand why a car he considered faster than Mercedes during the race still finished behind Russell in the battle for the final podium place.
For Hamilton and Leclerc, the Dutch Grand Prix therefore ended with the same underlying frustration from different perspectives. Both had enough pace to believe more was possible, while Ferrari left Zandvoort with fourth and fifth and a clear instruction from its team principal to analyse how execution allowed a potential podium opportunity to slip away.
Leave a Reply